Are High-Tech "Smart Guns" Another Gun Control Tactic?

Comments are Disabled

2nd Amendment opponents are definitely creative when it comes to their arguments and tactics. The latest out-of-the-box effort came from Attorney General Eric Holder, when he testified before a House appropriations subcommittee April 7.

The nation’s AG proposed new technology to make guns “more safe.” See for yourself:

I think that one of the things that we learned when we were trying to get passed those “common sense” reforms last year, Vice President Biden and I had a meeting with a group of technology people and we talked about how guns can be made more safe. By making them either through finger print identification, the gun talks to a bracelet or something that you might wear, how guns can be used only by the person who is lawfully in possession of the weapon.

It’s those kinds of things that I think we want to try to explore so that we can make sure that people have the ability to enjoy their Second Amendment rights, but at the same time decreasing the misuse of weapons that lead to the kinds of things that we see on a daily basis.

This type of technology that can be tracked (and more than likely controlled) by the federal government is a gun-grabbers dream. These so-called “smart guns” aren’t a new idea. Many people tend to believe that new technologies are a solution for existing (or perceived) problems.

For years, inventors have toyed with various forms of “smart guns,” and the first ones were made available at the Oak Tree Gun Club near Los Angeles earlier this year.

However, the shop got so much backlash from 2nd Amendment supporters that owner James Mitchell issued an apology and pulled it off the store’s shelves.

When it comes to “smart guns,” there are two main ideas.

1) The gun would be equipped with a biometric scanner that recognizes the owner’s fingerprints before it can fire. In theory, this mechanism would allow the owner to pick up his handgun and fire, and prevent a child or a burglar from picking it up and using it.

2) The gun would be paired with a bracelet or watch equipped with an RFID chip that, when in very close proximity to a sensor in the firearm, signals that the appropriate user of the firearm has control of it and the firearm would then be able to fire.

Both ideas are equally ridiculous, as they depend on new technology that would need to work 100% of the time for the owner to use his gun. If the technology malfunctions or the bracelet isn’t in close enough distance to the gun, it could make the firearm useless in an emergency – and put the owner (and possibly his family) in danger.

While the reduction of gun violence is an admirable goal, two decades of data isn’t on the gun-grabber’s side. In May 2013 the Pew Research Center reported that the American homicide rate had gone down by 49% since 1993. In the same time period, more states allowed their citizens to legally conceal-carry a firearm.

Breitbart.com reported last year the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime found that countries with the highest firearms ownership rate also had the lowest crime rates. This debunks the liberal “logic” behind smart guns that the firearm itself must be changed.

While gun-control advocates continue to use emotionally-driven arguments, the facts and data are overwhelmingly on the side of Constitutional gun ownership. The latest “smart gun” proposal is another thinly-disguised attempt to infringe on Americans’ 2nd Amendment rights.